exist, desire to participate in the privileges of Christian communion, so that we may all be ONE fold under ONE Shepherd. We call on Protestants of every denomination to listen to our admonitions, and partake the fruit of our meditations. We are not ashamed of the word Protestant in any sense; but deny that it can only be used in a negative one. We declare that it is essentially an affirmative term; that it testifies for whatever is rightly positive and institutional, and only against whatever is corruptive and abusive. It declares in favour of truth and piety, and condemns only falsehood and hypocrisy. Furthermore, it asserts that Rome has abused, and consequently forfeited, many of her privileges as a Church of Christ; while the Church of England, having submitted to be reformed, still retains all hers." The reader will now perceive that the words, taken together, mean the very contrary of latitudinarianism. The address is truly made to "Protestants of every denomination,' ,"* but only to "such as, lamenting the divisions that exist, desire to participate in the privileges of Christian communion, so that we may all be ONE fold under ONE Shepherd;" and afterwards we identify ourselves with the Church of England, in contradistinction from the Church of Rome. We appeal, then, to Protestants of every denomination, not for the sake of sanctioning dissent, but for the sake of inviting such of its members as are religiously and devoutly disposed to enter the fold of the Church of England. Now, the obvious aim of "The English (?) Churchman" is not to induce the members of dissent to return within the pleasant borders of the Anglican Church, but to induce the clergy of the Church of England to enter the Church of Rome. The Church of Rome, also, is a mother so loving, that she permits lying to any extent both in herself and her children. To expose this systematic mendacity we make these strictures, and not because the passage quoted relates to ourselves. We feel obliged by any notice, adverse or favourable, to our views; our present object being publicity. Pious frauds of all kinds, however, must be hunted down. We doubt not that the withdrawal, even, of "The British Critic," is a pious fraud. The appearance of powerful opponents in the field of controversy cannot but be matter of interest and anxiety to the Tractarians; still, we believe not that it is from fear that they withdraw from the contest-but it is from policy. They seek to carry on the war by means of a masked batteryto conceal, not to reveal, their Romanist bias. Now, "The British Critic" has gone too far, has spoken too plainly, and has placed itself in the position of being answered at once as a decided partisan of *By-the-by, their quotation gives, "Protestants of all denominations." Mendacity is so habitual to them, that they cannot even be correct on points of indifference. † See on this subject, in our Correspondence of this month, a letter from "A Clerical Subscriber," in relation to Mr. Sibthorpe. We have not thought it worth while in the text to mention, though we do here, that the ridiculous assertion concerning our manifesto (as the critic calls it) extending to 81 solid pages, is impudently false. Our leading article occupies 21 pages; and that and six other papers fill 81 pages, three pages and a half being devoted to a poem from Danté; every paper, too, being written by a different author. In what sense can a collection of such articles be called a manifesto? The motive for this representation is obvious enough. Rome. It must, therefore, be put out of sight; but we should not wonder, if another journal, under the same conduct, but with a different title, were to be started, and so contrived as to disarm suspicion by some fraudulent pretence, and, under the cover of Altitudinarianism, do the work of Rome in the name of the Church of England. But this, brethren, is the mark whereby ye shall know them: If anywhere they make the priest the mediator instead of Christ, be ye sure that they are Romans, not Anglicans. And with this warning, we for the present must conclude. LAYS OF THE WIND. Loud Wind! musician wild! What themes of song are thine? His shadow have begun to breathe; And they have breathed their parting sigh, From century to century; And he lived on from age to age, A hoary king, a crowned sage, A moralist right venerable, Whom long experiences enable To prophesy, in sun and shower, Of Birth and Death-two names, one Power! Our birth a death to life supernal, And death our birth to life eternal! What themes of song are thine? What themes of song are thine? And the lightnings show, to the ghastly night, The ship that was built from the tree thou didst smite; With others that felt the woodman's stroke Their keen eyes are flashing through sails thou hast rent, "Who holdeth the strongest of winds in his fist," Thy voice is hushed-thou'rt stilled again! Such theme of song is thine! What theme of song is thine? Thou singest of the rocking Tower, The while the heavens with thunder lower. In vain oppose the strong Wind's march; In his loud voice-an oracle That will be heard-that will command The air, the ocean, and the land An influence holy and divine, Which shall remove the throne, the shrine! Then in the soul, to freedom dear, Palace and temple shall appear, Not built with hands, but breathed by thee, Such theme of song is thine! Soul! by the truth made free! J. A. H. 143 RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY; OR, A STATEMENT OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PHILOSOPHY OF MR. GLADSTONE'S THEORY OF THE RELATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, AND THAT OF THE LATE MR. S. T. COLERIDGE. * AFTER having had for many years to struggle with the materialism engendered in the mind of the English student by the study of Locke and Paley, the philosophy of Coleridge has now, for some time, so far obtained and maintained a victorious position as to be quoted, by almost every logical mind of any influence, not only with respect, but as authoritative. None, perhaps, have done this more frequently and prerogatively than the followers of Dr. Pusey; taking, however, occasion to pervert the doctrines of the "Old man eloquent" to the support of their own dogmas, not one of which he would have conceded. This they could the more readily do, as Coleridge professed altitudinarian principles, and supported them with the strongest possible arguments. Had it been otherwise, however, the Tractarians would have contrived to enlist him, apparently, on their side; since they have actually done the same with Mr. Thomas Carlyle, whose opinions have little of a positive character, and whose heroes are all of the democratic and puritan school. In fact, the schismatics to whom we have alluded have strained every nerve to avail themselves of the modern transcendental philosophy, whether of domestic or foreign growth, and have frequently placed themselves on vantage-ground by the use of weapons drawn from the arsenals of Kant, Fichte, and Schelling, with which our general clergy are perhaps too little acquainted. An attentive reader of "The Times" newspaper will, in addition to its avowed Tractarianism, discover not a little of Kantism also in the tone of its articles, and particularly of its critical articles, in which the Sage of Königsberg is frequently commended as the father of all that is valuable in modern philosophy. The same policy was pursued by Mr. Gladstone, in his celebrated book on the Relations of Church and State; and the quiet assumption therein contained, of the Coleridgean philosophy being favourable to the non-juring views of that work, has not a little afflicted the literary executors of the departed master; and accordingly, in the last edition of the "Aids to Reflection," a vigorous attempt is made to deliver the memory of their author from having contributed in any degree to the revival of obsolete superstitions. The expediency of this has since been further demonstrated, by the circumstance of Mr. Gladstone having contributed an article all but Pro-romanist, to the 4th Number of "The Foreign and Colonial Review," on the Prospects of the Church of England. Worthily has the effort been made, worthy both of the author and the theme: but our admiration is indefinitely increased at finding that this great and arduous work has been under * "On Rationalism," by Sara Coleridge: being Appendix C to the 5th and last edition of Coleridge's " Aids to Reflection." London: W. Pickering. 1843. taken by a woman-the poet's daughter-the authoress of "Phantasmion," who has thus vindicated her claim to the joint possession of the liveliest fancy and the severest reason. Her essay "On Rationalism," to the examination of which we now proceed, is distinguished by logical powers of the highest kind, and of judgement in their use, to a remarkable degree. Mrs. Coleridge (now, alas! by the death of the poet's nephew, the excellent Henry Nelson Coleridge, a widow) undertook this important essay by the desire of her late estimable husband, who lived long enough to witness its production, but not its publication. His last words, both on the essay and the philosophy it was written to support, cannot fail to be interesting. "This is the fifth edition of the Aids to Reflection,' published in England; and there have been three in the United States of America. It deserves note, less with reference to the author himself, than to the moral and religious history of this age. Since 1824, when the work first appeared, the tone has changed, and the senseless imputation of obscurity, and vagueness, and Germanism—so general then-is now but faintly heard, and in the mouths of Sciolists alone. Those who buy this volume, buy seriously, and because they stand in need. It is found to be clear, and particular, and practical, by minds seeking light to enlighten; and, now that the evil side of modern Germanism in religion-its pantheistic spirit-is better understood, it will be seen that here is contained its most striking confutation by the side of the firmest assertion of the Evangelical truth. But the Aids to Reflection' did not at first suit all the views of high Churchmen, nor all the views of low Churchmen, and it will not suit them now. This is an antagonism, the issue whereof cannot yet be known. "Meantime, the cause of religious philosophy has suffered a great loss in America, by the recent death of Dr. Marsh, who, if longer life and better health had been granted to him, might have done much. But there are others-fellow-countrymen and pupils of his, upon whom his mantle has fallen. May they prosper! "The Essay On Rationalism,' in the Appendix C to this edition, appeared to be so much in harmony with the principles of the Aids to Reflection,' and to represent so accurately the views of Mr. Coleridge on some other points, that the editor trusts it will not seem out of place in this publication. Certainly no subject could at any time have more needed a plain statement, than that involved in the origin and vulgar application of this mystified word, Rationalism." Proceed we now to our analysis of the essay itself. After identifying the term Reason with Ratio, the talented authoress proceeds to remark on the abusive sense in which the word Rationalism is vulgarly employed, as implying a wrong or unwarrantable use of Reason. But she loses no time in reminding us that "there can be no misuse of Reason in the primary and proper sense, as the light by which we read the law written in the heart, or rather the law itself, read by its own light, when that is enkindled from above." Nevertheless, men may reason amiss, when Reason is used, not as a fine spiritual organ, but as the ground of formal principles, in reference to subjects either of moral or physical speculation; but then it is the Understanding which is in error, and not the Reason. "We must, therefore," says Mrs. Coleridge, "understand by Rationalism, wrong reasonings respecting the power of reasoning in human beings-a misconception of its nature, an attribution to it of that which it does not possess, or an |